Creative Architecture or Public Art?

Kwon argues that “public art work s[are] meant to play a supplementary but crucial role in the amelioration of what were perceived to be the ill effects of the repetitive, monotonous, and functionalist style of modernist architecture” (64). Therefore, to what extent is a marble fountain in the courtyard of a townhome complex, a form of public art? How about if we place it inside a prison quad? Would adding a gaudy color and elaborate centerpiece sculpture add to the public art ‘points’ of this fountain? Who decides how generic or elaborate a public art creation can be?

The aesthetic value of public art is determined by its use value in the functionalist wave which unfolded in the 1980’s. However, where do we draw the line between artistic innovation and architectural commercialization of more aesthetically-pleasing elements? Do these two fields overlap when public art is in question? With regards to Serra’s argument of site-specific art as “constituting a precise discomposure between the art work and its site…bring[ing] into relief the repressed social contradictions that underlie public places” (75), would the photograph mural in front of Dwinelle Hall, then, be considered a site-specific form of public art?